Yes, the true racing line would be something like lane 5 sweeping into lane 1, (through small pieces of lane 4, 3 and 2), and then back out to lane 6 on the corner exit, (again through small pieces of lane 2, 3, 4 and 5), but therefore this means that lane 1 is indeed part of the true racing line for part of the corner, (the apex), and so Max is already in lane 1 once lane 1 gets it's moment as being part of the true racing line was basically what I meant, but I wasn't super clear. Then Kimi joins lane 1 late and forces Max off the track and still hits him.

At the point they touch, they are both already on the racing line but it is Kimi that is the one moving laterally and so is the one at fault as Max is already 'there' in that lane travelling forwards and Kimi is essentially cutting him up and sweeping across into that lane when it isn't clear to do so. Just like on the motorway, even on the race track drivers should only move into lanes that are clear when they are racing one another.

Honestly, I think you are just being obstinate at this point. Do you realize that, through this perspective, a driver could simply dive up the inside from way behind the guy in front, overshoot the apex by a mile and still be entitled to the corner (and the position gained on the driver actually taking a reasonable entry into the corner)? If the other guy doesn't back off, it's his fault in your mind? It's just not a viable way to go racing.

Honestly, I think you are just being obstinate at this point. Do you realize that, through this perspective, a driver could simply dive up the inside from way behind the guy in front, overshoot the apex by a mile and still be entitled to the corner (and the position gained on the driver actually taking a reasonable entry into the corner)? If the other guy doesn't back off, it's his fault in your mind? It's just not a viable way to go racing.

It is a viable way to go racing. If someone comes from miles back with a divebomb, (like Bottas in the Williams vs Kimi in the Ferrari a few years back), the divebomber is clearly just punting the other guy off by braking too late and so it is more like a Max/Vettel - Britain 2019 type incident.

Remember the divebomber can not be flying into the other driver's lane with his crazy late braking move. This is why people don't like Danny Ric's divebombs, because he is flying across multiple lanes when he does this.

Virtually all of these incidents can be deciphered by applying lane theory to work out who was at fault. It is possible for both drivers to be at fault if both cars move laterally into the same lane at the same moment say, (not this Belgium situation of course, but for example if one driver is in lane 4 and the other driver is in lane 2 and they both move laterally into lane 3 at the same time then this would be both at fault).

F1 Racer, you're quite something else! I asked you, in discussing your views of something Mikeyg posted, to quote the two rules you seemed to be getting rather spectacularly wrong. You fail to produce the rules you meant, and now you're asking somebody else? Well, well, well...

No, it was specifically because of you asking for me to quote rules that I wanted to establish what specific rule Vettel broke in Britain. Everyone just accepted it as a 'common sense' 20 second penalty without requiring rules to be quoted for Vettel's transgression, however for the potential Kimi one you are asking me to quote specific rules that are broken. So ironically you believed I was being inconsistent by asking for a specific rule, but it was actually your inconsistency, (not requiring rules to be quoted in Britain, but are requiring it here), which prompted me to change my tact and angle with pokerman.

So it is you that is quite something else, not me.

What rule did Vettel break exactly? Why was he penalised? If it was down to 'common sense', then that same 'common sense' is the rule that I am 'quoting' for this Kimi situation, so I am using that situation to cover your initial questions about quoting rules.

What's even more funny is that in your quote above, you underline the first bit, but also include the sentence below it where I explain my rationale for wanting a rules quotation for Vettel/Britain so clearly you didn't read that part and just jumped at the chance to try and catch me out on the underlined first part, without looking at the context of the sentence below. Because I liken the two situations, (Vettel/Britain and Kimi/Belgium), as they both involve a driver having his race ruined by careless driving from the other driver. I am saying that IF Kimi is at fault for Belgium, then the rule he would have broken is the same one that Vettel broke.

It is fine to include your rationale. But it is far better to actually read the rule as published. And that is why I asked you to quote them.

As for the Vettel vs Verstappen accident at the British Grand Prix, it suffices to read the stewards' report which says:

Reason The Stewards reviewed the video evidence which showed car 5 locked wheels under braking and collided with the rear of car 33. The Stewards concluded that the driver of car 5 was wholly to blame for the incident [ref Article 38.2 a) of the 2019 Formula 1 Sporting Regulations].

Just like on the motorway, even on the race track drivers should only move into lanes that are clear when they are racing one another.

And I'm done.

That's surprising when lane theory helps conceptualise and define the crowding off the track rule that is in place and prohibited behaviour in today's F1.

The point is NOT at turn 1, 10 seconds into the race. I don't really understand why you are pursuing this, do you feel Max was hard done by? A large number of experienced racers, stewards, professional spectators and posters all agree it was a Racing Incident, it's a topic that has gone far, lived its life, time to move on to Italy.

c) curves, as well as the approach and exit zones thereof, may be negotiated by the drivers in any way they wish, within the limits of the track. Overtaking, according to the circumstances, may be done either on the right or on the left. However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers such as premature changes of direction, more than one change of direction, deliberate crowding of cars towards the inside or the outside of the curve or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited and shall be penalised, according to the importance and repetition of the offences, by penalties ranging from a fine to the exclusion from the race. The repetition of dangerous driving, even involuntary, may result in the exclusion from the race

Now the move Kimi made was deliberate in that he intended to move across into his blindspot which was careless but nevertheless deliberate.

Disagree on both counts. The move was not premature and he did not deliberately crowd another driver. If you take the latter to heart, half the field would be penalised at turn 1.

Just like on the motorway, even on the race track drivers should only move into lanes that are clear when they are racing one another.

And I'm done.

That's surprising when lane theory helps conceptualise and define the crowding off the track rule that is in place and prohibited behaviour in today's F1.

The point is NOT at turn 1, 10 seconds into the race. I don't really understand why you are pursuing this, do you feel Max was hard done by? A large number of experienced racers, stewards, professional spectators and posters all agree it was a Racing Incident, it's a topic that has gone far, lived its life, time to move on to Italy.

It being turn 1 does not mean that you can get away with absolutely anything, and carelessly taking another driver out of the race should qualify as something punishable.

It certainly used to, I remember Mika Hakkinen getting a 1 race ban after causing a crash at the start in Germany 1994 after also being penalised for a late race crash in Britain 1994.

Plus Senna gets a lot of heat for his turn 1 move on Prost in Japan 1990.

Kimi was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.Verstappen was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.They share the blame for what they did to each other. Racing incident.

However, objectively Kimi is only very slightly responsible for the harm inflicted on himself.Verstappen on the other hand, had more choices to avoid inflicting harm on himself. Not to say his choice was 100% wrong. There's a lot of mitigation. But a lot less that Kimi had for his decisions. Put it this way, you'd reckon Kimi would been a little more circumspect than bombing down the inside. But I can also understand Verstappen deciding to go for it, damn the consequences, as he was pinned down the inside.

Again. Racing incident. Anyone trying to argue Kimi is more to blame should study the principle of mutually assured destruction.

Verstappen went racing and is not responsible, he is just doing his job, (trying to overtake someone). Kimi in effect tries to block Verstappen but he tries to block him too late with Max having a decent chunk of his car already alongside.

As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.

If you look at Kimi's onboard he never knew Verstappen was there, he cleared Verstappen at the start and then that ceased to be a concern for him, he was just racing Perez hence he came across the track to block Perez off. Then Perez moved to the left and you can see Kimi look in his left hand mirror to see what Perez was doing, it's at this point that Verstappen is outbraking Kimi on the right with Kimi looking to the left.

Kimi was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.Verstappen was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.They share the blame for what they did to each other. Racing incident.

However, objectively Kimi is only very slightly responsible for the harm inflicted on himself.Verstappen on the other hand, had more choices to avoid inflicting harm on himself. Not to say his choice was 100% wrong. There's a lot of mitigation. But a lot less that Kimi had for his decisions. Put it this way, you'd reckon Kimi would been a little more circumspect than bombing down the inside. But I can also understand Verstappen deciding to go for it, damn the consequences, as he was pinned down the inside.

Again. Racing incident. Anyone trying to argue Kimi is more to blame should study the principle of mutually assured destruction.

Verstappen went racing and is not responsible, he is just doing his job, (trying to overtake someone). Kimi in effect tries to block Verstappen but he tries to block him too late with Max having a decent chunk of his car already alongside.

As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.

If you look at Kimi's onboard he never knew Verstappen was there, he cleared Verstappen at the start and then that ceased to be a concern for him, he was just racing Perez hence he came across the track to block Perez off. Then Perez moved to the left and you can see Kimi look in his left hand mirror to see what Perez was doing, it's at this point that Verstappen is outbraking Kimi on the right with Kimi looking to the left.

It really isn't too much to ask for drivers to just remain approximately in their lane for one corner is it? Particularly when it will keep them out of a collision which can hurt their own race as well as others, (Kimi lost out badly from his foolishness). Bottas and many other drivers applied this technique so it is far from impossible to do and is actually better driving as it stops you trashing your own race at turn 1. Isn't there a saying that you can't win the race at the first corner, but you can lose it?

Maybe Kimi didn't get a penalty because he himself lost out from the contact but when you ruin someone else's race in the process, there should be more deterrent to help drivers like Kimi learn.

Kimi was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.Verstappen was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.They share the blame for what they did to each other. Racing incident.

However, objectively Kimi is only very slightly responsible for the harm inflicted on himself.Verstappen on the other hand, had more choices to avoid inflicting harm on himself. Not to say his choice was 100% wrong. There's a lot of mitigation. But a lot less that Kimi had for his decisions. Put it this way, you'd reckon Kimi would been a little more circumspect than bombing down the inside. But I can also understand Verstappen deciding to go for it, damn the consequences, as he was pinned down the inside.

Again. Racing incident. Anyone trying to argue Kimi is more to blame should study the principle of mutually assured destruction.

Verstappen went racing and is not responsible, he is just doing his job, (trying to overtake someone). Kimi in effect tries to block Verstappen but he tries to block him too late with Max having a decent chunk of his car already alongside.

As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.

If you look at Kimi's onboard he never knew Verstappen was there, he cleared Verstappen at the start and then that ceased to be a concern for him, he was just racing Perez hence he came across the track to block Perez off. Then Perez moved to the left and you can see Kimi look in his left hand mirror to see what Perez was doing, it's at this point that Verstappen is outbraking Kimi on the right with Kimi looking to the left.

It really isn't too much to ask for drivers to just remain approximately in their lane for one corner is it? Particularly when it will keep them out of a collision which can hurt their own race as well as others, (Kimi lost out badly from his foolishness). Bottas and many other drivers applied this technique so it is far from impossible to do and is actually better driving as it stops you trashing your own race at turn 1. Isn't there a saying that you can't win the race at the first corner, but you can lose it?

Maybe Kimi didn't get a penalty because he himself lost out from the contact but when you ruin someone else's race in the process, there should be more deterrent to help drivers like Kimi learn.

He's 40 and 300+ races into a highly successful career. If you think he needs to learn anything about racecraft it might be time to entertain the possibility that you are the one who needs to do some learning. Just a thought.

I thought what verstappen did was a bit of a lunge really. Kimi had cleared him enough to take the line he did. Verstappen wouldn't have been where he was if it wasn't for the fact he braked too late. Kimi had no reason to expect this as the speed verstappen was going will still have been enough for a bump even if Kimi had given more space. But I think Verstappen just braked too late. It is a bit like Bottas / Kimi in russia 2015 though much slower and at the start of the race. Kimi did a last lap lunge down the inside. Bottas had started doing the normal line and Kimi was just way too optimistic and came from too far back with too much speed. Verstappen did the same and he also should have been aware that it was the start and there were far more cars about. He just didn't need to be going the speed he was. I don't see how kimi can be expected to have noticed or predicted he would be there before it was too late. i can no way see kimi getting a penalty for this no matter what the outcome was.

Verstappen unusually seemed to accept that Kimi won't have been able to see him and he just moved on from it. I respect him for this. Though the reason for him crashing and the manner of driving after the contact was dangerous and idiotic and I think he should have got a penalty for driving in this manner.

As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.

If you look at Kimi's onboard he never knew Verstappen was there, he cleared Verstappen at the start and then that ceased to be a concern for him, he was just racing Perez hence he came across the track to block Perez off. Then Perez moved to the left and you can see Kimi look in his left hand mirror to see what Perez was doing, it's at this point that Verstappen is outbraking Kimi on the right with Kimi looking to the left.

It really isn't too much to ask for drivers to just remain approximately in their lane for one corner is it? Particularly when it will keep them out of a collision which can hurt their own race as well as others, (Kimi lost out badly from his foolishness). Bottas and many other drivers applied this technique so it is far from impossible to do and is actually better driving as it stops you trashing your own race at turn 1. Isn't there a saying that you can't win the race at the first corner, but you can lose it?

Maybe Kimi didn't get a penalty because he himself lost out from the contact but when you ruin someone else's race in the process, there should be more deterrent to help drivers like Kimi learn.

He's 40 and 300+ races into a highly successful career. If you think he needs to learn anything about racecraft it might be time to entertain the possibility that you are the one who needs to do some learning. Just a thought.

Doesn't Vettel make a lot of mistakes despite being experienced? And Vettel is better than Kimi.

I guess when Kimi hit Hamilton at the start in Britain 2018 it wasn't really Kimi's fault either as he was experienced then too.

If Kimi didn't make a mistake in Belgium 2019 then you are saying that there was nothing that he could have done differently and that his collision and subsequent fall down the order was inevitable and unpreventable from himself.

At the end of the day, I am right here because I have pointed out what Kimi could have done differently to avoid this crash whilst likely staying ahead of Verstappen too. It's not like I am saying he cocked up but at the same time am unable to come up with a solution for him.

I thought what verstappen did was a bit of a lunge really. Kimi had cleared him enough to take the line he did. Verstappen wouldn't have been where he was if it wasn't for the fact he braked too late. Kimi had no reason to expect this as the speed verstappen was going will still have been enough for a bump even if Kimi had given more space. But I think Verstappen just braked too late. It is a bit like Bottas / Kimi in russia 2015 though much slower and at the start of the race. Kimi did a last lap lunge down the inside. Bottas had started doing the normal line and Kimi was just way too optimistic and came from too far back with too much speed. Verstappen did the same and he also should have been aware that it was the start and there were far more cars about. He just didn't need to be going the speed he was. I don't see how kimi can be expected to have noticed or predicted he would be there before it was too late. i can no way see kimi getting a penalty for this no matter what the outcome was.

Verstappen unusually seemed to accept that Kimi won't have been able to see him and he just moved on from it. I respect him for this. Though the reason for him crashing and the manner of driving after the contact was dangerous and idiotic and I think he should have got a penalty for driving in this manner.

Kimi had obviously not cleared him and Max had not braked too late or he would have overshot and not been able to steer his car over the inside curbs. If you are going too fast for the corner then you go wide towards the outside of the corner; you do not allow yourself to steer super sharply towards the inside of the corner.

Max was not going too fast, just check the replays. He was easily making this corner on the inside path.

Kimi was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.Verstappen was responsible for about 50% of the harm to Verstappen.They share the blame for what they did to each other. Racing incident.

However, objectively Kimi is only very slightly responsible for the harm inflicted on himself.Verstappen on the other hand, had more choices to avoid inflicting harm on himself. Not to say his choice was 100% wrong. There's a lot of mitigation. But a lot less that Kimi had for his decisions. Put it this way, you'd reckon Kimi would been a little more circumspect than bombing down the inside. But I can also understand Verstappen deciding to go for it, damn the consequences, as he was pinned down the inside.

Again. Racing incident. Anyone trying to argue Kimi is more to blame should study the principle of mutually assured destruction.

Verstappen went racing and is not responsible, he is just doing his job, (trying to overtake someone). Kimi in effect tries to block Verstappen but he tries to block him too late with Max having a decent chunk of his car already alongside.

As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.

If you look at Kimi's onboard he never knew Verstappen was there, he cleared Verstappen at the start and then that ceased to be a concern for him, he was just racing Perez hence he came across the track to block Perez off. Then Perez moved to the left and you can see Kimi look in his left hand mirror to see what Perez was doing, it's at this point that Verstappen is outbraking Kimi on the right with Kimi looking to the left.

It really isn't too much to ask for drivers to just remain approximately in their lane for one corner is it? Particularly when it will keep them out of a collision which can hurt their own race as well as others, (Kimi lost out badly from his foolishness). Bottas and many other drivers applied this technique so it is far from impossible to do and is actually better driving as it stops you trashing your own race at turn 1. Isn't there a saying that you can't win the race at the first corner, but you can lose it?

Maybe Kimi didn't get a penalty because he himself lost out from the contact but when you ruin someone else's race in the process, there should be more deterrent to help drivers like Kimi learn.

So he never cleared Verstappen's car off the start, he never had his car fully 1 car length in front of Vertstappen's car and he never was acclerating away from Verstappen's car?

As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.

If you look at Kimi's onboard he never knew Verstappen was there, he cleared Verstappen at the start and then that ceased to be a concern for him, he was just racing Perez hence he came across the track to block Perez off. Then Perez moved to the left and you can see Kimi look in his left hand mirror to see what Perez was doing, it's at this point that Verstappen is outbraking Kimi on the right with Kimi looking to the left.

It really isn't too much to ask for drivers to just remain approximately in their lane for one corner is it? Particularly when it will keep them out of a collision which can hurt their own race as well as others, (Kimi lost out badly from his foolishness). Bottas and many other drivers applied this technique so it is far from impossible to do and is actually better driving as it stops you trashing your own race at turn 1. Isn't there a saying that you can't win the race at the first corner, but you can lose it?

Maybe Kimi didn't get a penalty because he himself lost out from the contact but when you ruin someone else's race in the process, there should be more deterrent to help drivers like Kimi learn.

So he never cleared Verstappen's car off the start, he never had his car fully 1 car length in front of Vertstappen's car and he never was acclerating away from Verstappen's car?

He can't tell if a car is on his inside so why cut into that space? If not Verstappen, then what if someone else from 10th place was having an amazing start and coming down the inside? Kimi's line through the corner would just make him collide with them instead, so why take a line that allows you to collide with someone on the inside, whoever that person may be? It makes no logical sense to take that path through the corner, and therefore it was a mistake.

As mentioned previously in this thread, Max came from a long way back and was out of Kimi's vision (only Perez was visible in his mirrors at that point). Max chose to make up for his poor start by doing a divebomb into La Source which, as we all know, nine times out of ten, isn't going to work.

It's also worth noting how far back he was from the front four from the point of braking to corner apex; even Perez does the sensible thing and backed out, switching to the left to avoid the Red Bull squeezing him.

If you look at Kimi's onboard he never knew Verstappen was there, he cleared Verstappen at the start and then that ceased to be a concern for him, he was just racing Perez hence he came across the track to block Perez off. Then Perez moved to the left and you can see Kimi look in his left hand mirror to see what Perez was doing, it's at this point that Verstappen is outbraking Kimi on the right with Kimi looking to the left.

It really isn't too much to ask for drivers to just remain approximately in their lane for one corner is it? Particularly when it will keep them out of a collision which can hurt their own race as well as others, (Kimi lost out badly from his foolishness). Bottas and many other drivers applied this technique so it is far from impossible to do and is actually better driving as it stops you trashing your own race at turn 1. Isn't there a saying that you can't win the race at the first corner, but you can lose it?

Maybe Kimi didn't get a penalty because he himself lost out from the contact but when you ruin someone else's race in the process, there should be more deterrent to help drivers like Kimi learn.

So he never cleared Verstappen's car off the start, he never had his car fully 1 car length in front of Vertstappen's car and he never was acclerating away from Verstappen's car?

He can't tell if a car is on his inside so why cut into that space? If not Verstappen, then what if someone else from 10th place was having an amazing start and coming down the inside? Kimi's line through the corner would just make him collide with them instead, so why take a line that allows you to collide with someone on the inside, whoever that person may be? It makes no logical sense to take that path through the corner, and therefore it was a mistake.

Well my interest in this has never being in trying to apportion blame but only to question the level of risk that Verstappen took, out braking 2 cars into a tight hairpin corner.

Same goes for Max though. Why take the risk and approach so quickly on the inside where you can't stop? Kimi may have space but if he is penned in, has contact with someone else or out of control then Max has no.where to go and its the same result. Norris approaches like someone much more experienced would, avoids all the trouble and emerges in 5th. The lead driver on the other hand will close the gap if he is well clear as they know most won't take the risK. And those that do, like Max will learn. Just try looking at it the other way and ask why would he leave the door open for the odd driver to take a gamble and brake a lot later. If he'd gambled, braked later then Max wouldn't have got close anyway but everyone around is being more cautious.

It really isn't too much to ask for drivers to just remain approximately in their lane for one corner is it? Particularly when it will keep them out of a collision which can hurt their own race as well as others, (Kimi lost out badly from his foolishness). Bottas and many other drivers applied this technique so it is far from impossible to do and is actually better driving as it stops you trashing your own race at turn 1. Isn't there a saying that you can't win the race at the first corner, but you can lose it?

Maybe Kimi didn't get a penalty because he himself lost out from the contact but when you ruin someone else's race in the process, there should be more deterrent to help drivers like Kimi learn.

So he never cleared Verstappen's car off the start, he never had his car fully 1 car length in front of Vertstappen's car and he never was acclerating away from Verstappen's car?

He can't tell if a car is on his inside so why cut into that space? If not Verstappen, then what if someone else from 10th place was having an amazing start and coming down the inside? Kimi's line through the corner would just make him collide with them instead, so why take a line that allows you to collide with someone on the inside, whoever that person may be? It makes no logical sense to take that path through the corner, and therefore it was a mistake.

Well my interest in this has never being in trying to apportion blame but only to question the level of risk that Verstappen took, out braking 2 cars into a tight hairpin corner.

It's only a risk if the driver turns into you, had it been Bottas he was passing then Bottas wouldn't have turned into him, and we want to encourage drivers to try to overtake don't we? So long as you can get your car well up the inside of the other car, you have a right to space.

Same goes for Max though. Why take the risk and approach so quickly on the inside where you can't stop? Kimi may have space but if he is penned in, has contact with someone else or out of control then Max has no.where to go and its the same result. Norris approaches like someone much more experienced would, avoids all the trouble and emerges in 5th. The lead driver on the other hand will close the gap if he is well clear as they know most won't take the risK. And those that do, like Max will learn. Just try looking at it the other way and ask why would he leave the door open for the odd driver to take a gamble and brake a lot later. If he'd gambled, braked later then Max wouldn't have got close anyway but everyone around is being more cautious.

Where is the proof Max couldn't stop? If you brake too late, you go flying towards the outside of the corner in a straight line, you don't manage to steer into the inside green area of the corner even tighter than normal. Max was able to get his car onto the green surface, how can he do this if he is braking too late?

Same goes for Max though. Why take the risk and approach so quickly on the inside where you can't stop? Kimi may have space but if he is penned in, has contact with someone else or out of control then Max has no.where to go and its the same result. Norris approaches like someone much more experienced would, avoids all the trouble and emerges in 5th. The lead driver on the other hand will close the gap if he is well clear as they know most won't take the risK. And those that do, like Max will learn. Just try looking at it the other way and ask why would he leave the door open for the odd driver to take a gamble and brake a lot later. If he'd gambled, braked later then Max wouldn't have got close anyway but everyone around is being more cautious.

Where is the proof Max couldn't stop? If you brake too late, you go flying towards the outside of the corner in a straight line, you don't manage to steer into the inside green area of the corner even tighter than normal. Max was able to get his car onto the green surface, how can he do this if he is braking too late?

Physics, the law of inertia, states that, unless acted upon by an external force, an object at rest remains at rest, or if in motion, it continues to move in a straight line with constant speed.

If he doesn't hit Kimi he continues across the track, can't possibly stay in his lane to use your argument. However, lane theory can't apply at the first corner as we all know.Incidentally where is the link for "lane theory" can't find it?

I've presented a pretty simple solution to deal with the chaos of the first corner, and that is to simply hold your line and don't switch lines through turn 1 if you aren't clear of the pack. Kimi didn't do this even though it is common sense to do this and other drivers did this, so he is at fault. He changed his line through the corner, potentially cutting up other drivers in the process, which is exactly what happened.

This would work if racing was done in a controlled laboratory setting or if it was a Sunday drive on the highway. Everybody stays in their lane. That's not how it works though and drivers take calculated risks all the time. In this case, there some blame on both drivers. Max made a late move under braking, which always greatly increases chances of a collision while Kimi missed the fact that there was a car diving under him. There is one thing that hasn't been brought up as far as I've seen though. Let's say that Kimi leaves a car's width of space on the inside. How is he supposed to foresee whether drivers to the outside of him are going to leave at least two lanes open? The expectation and assumption is usually that other drivers will leave as little room as possible.

I think that in this case Max needs to suck it up and learn from it. He bungled the start and tried to make up for it video-game style. He is not fighting for a championship this year so it's no big deal, but he will need to learn when to avoid such risks when in a close WDC battle, which I am sure is in his future.

Verstappen was making that corner - he was turning in and I saw no evidence of understeer. Unfortunately he was turning in to an ever-closing gap caused by Raikkonen who had been dealing with a mirror-full of Racing Point and simply did not see Verstappen until it was too late.With turn 1 being generally so crowded at the start, it's quite understandable to see this as a racing incident. I wouldn't be apportioning blame.

Verstappen was making that corner - he was turning in and I saw no evidence of understeer. Unfortunately he was turning in to an ever-closing gap caused by Raikkonen who had been dealing with a mirror-full of Racing Point and simply did not see Verstappen until it was too late.With turn 1 being generally so crowded at the start, it's quite understandable to see this as a racing incident. I wouldn't be apportioning blame.

He definitely would have made the turn… HOWEVER, had Raikkonen given him a bit more room… Verstappen would have veered far left to exit the corner with some sort of speed. He'd have to or the attempt would've been for nothing.

While you don't see where to apportion blame, Verstappen said Raikkonen was not at fault for the incident. I think most people have taken this whole racing incident the last few years and have run with it and no longer see fault even when it's obvious when the incident is broken down.

Yes these things happen really quickly, but incidents can only materialize once someone makes a series of decisions to initiate the series of events that lead to said incident. In this case, Verstappen was initially doing ok, but then decided that at all costs, he didn't want to be stuck behind the Sauber AND the Pink car so instead of lifting and braking a tad earlier and cautiously tucking in behind them, he decided to try and out-brake the Sauber AND take a most unconventional line at an angle where it's likely he wouldn't be seen (and subsequently wasn't), and since the leading driver couldn't see him, he thinks THE NORMAL RACING LINE is clear and tries to place his car on it and runs into Verstappen.

That's the reality of how and WHY the contact occurred, and that is WHY Verstappen owned up to it 100%.

This whole "it's just a racing incident" movement has gotten way out of control and it needs to stop. Drivers have become a bit too undisciplined in how little respect they have for track bounds and the racing line.

Same goes for Max though. Why take the risk and approach so quickly on the inside where you can't stop? Kimi may have space but if he is penned in, has contact with someone else or out of control then Max has no.where to go and its the same result. Norris approaches like someone much more experienced would, avoids all the trouble and emerges in 5th. The lead driver on the other hand will close the gap if he is well clear as they know most won't take the risK. And those that do, like Max will learn. Just try looking at it the other way and ask why would he leave the door open for the odd driver to take a gamble and brake a lot later. If he'd gambled, braked later then Max wouldn't have got close anyway but everyone around is being more cautious.

Where is the proof Max couldn't stop? If you brake too late, you go flying towards the outside of the corner in a straight line, you don't manage to steer into the inside green area of the corner even tighter than normal. Max was able to get his car onto the green surface, how can he do this if he is braking too late?

I’m talking about the level of risk and being able to stop if he needs to before he hits another car, just like Norris is able to do coming up behind them. The proof that he couldn’t stop is that he hit Kimi. And the only reason he manages to get so far alongside Kimi is because he is more aggressive into the corner than those around him on track.

No doubt the more cautious approach is going to lose Norris the odd place of the start when he is in the middle of the pack and drivers around will be more aggressive from time to time. But if these drivers have any aspirations of racing for championships then I think over time they will develop in a more cautious direction, because there are so many things outside of your control at the start, and you can’t afford to throw away 20 odd points.

F1 Racer, you're quite something else! I asked you, in discussing your views of something Mikeyg posted, to quote the two rules you seemed to be getting rather spectacularly wrong. You fail to produce the rules you meant, and now you're asking somebody else? Well, well, well...

No, it was specifically because of you asking for me to quote rules that I wanted to establish what specific rule Vettel broke in Britain. Everyone just accepted it as a 'common sense' 20 second penalty without requiring rules to be quoted for Vettel's transgression, however for the potential Kimi one you are asking me to quote specific rules that are broken. So ironically you believed I was being inconsistent by asking for a specific rule, but it was actually your inconsistency, (not requiring rules to be quoted in Britain, but are requiring it here), which prompted me to change my tact and angle with pokerman.

So it is you that is quite something else, not me.

What rule did Vettel break exactly? Why was he penalised? If it was down to 'common sense', then that same 'common sense' is the rule that I am 'quoting' for this Kimi situation, so I am using that situation to cover your initial questions about quoting rules.

What's even more funny is that in your quote above, you underline the first bit, but also include the sentence bel

ow it where I explain my rationale for wanting a rules quotation for Vettel/Britain so clearly you didn't read that part and just jumped at the chance to try and catch me out on the underlined first part, without looking at the context of the sentence below. Because I liken the two situations, (Vettel/Britain and Kimi/Belgium), as they both involve a driver having his race ruined by careless driving from the other driver. I am saying that IF Kimi is at fault for Belgium, then the rule he would have broken is the same one that Vettel broke.

c) curves, as well as the approach and exit zones thereof, may be negotiated by the drivers in any way they wish, within the limits of the track. Overtaking, according to the circumstances, may be done either on the right or on the left. However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers such as premature changes of direction, more than one change of direction, deliberate crowding of cars towards the inside or the outside of the curve or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited and shall be penalised, according to the importance and repetition of the offences, by penalties ranging from a fine to the exclusion from the race. The repetition of dangerous driving, even involuntary, may result in the exclusion from the race

Now the move Kimi made was deliberate in that he intended to move across into his blindspot which was careless but nevertheless deliberate.

Having been away a few days, I saw this post and feel I should acknowledge that you indeed have posted a relevant rule as published. What I dispute is that Räikkönen deliberately crowded Verstappen to the inside, or that he made an abnormal change of direction. The opposite is true. I also note you 'deliberately' forgot to include 'deliberate' in the underlined quote.I believe that if Räikkönen really had done either of those two things, he would have been investigated, because he was able to continue the race, despite the damage caused to his car. Verstappen wasn't investigated for crowding Räikkönen towards the outside at the second Eau Rouge corner, for the simple reason that he didn't have his car under control. Both drivers were extremely lucky at that point; that could have been a monster accident.

You aren't the first person to come up with the idea of having drivers follow lanes around corners, indeed Bernie Ecclestone thought it was worth thinking about. I believe that if all drivers respect the code of conduct as published, and are forced by the stewards to respect it, then lanes aren't necessary. But for that to be possible, it would first be necessary to make the rules and their interpretation clear and available to all - including race fans. The idea that it is fine for the inside driver, who is slightly ahead at the apex of the corner, to run the outsider into the scenery is downright wrong and continues to make motor racing more dangerous than it should be.

_________________Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

c) curves, as well as the approach and exit zones thereof, may be negotiated by the drivers in any way they wish, within the limits of the track. Overtaking, according to the circumstances, may be done either on the right or on the left. However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers such as premature changes of direction, more than one change of direction, deliberate crowding of cars towards the inside or the outside of the curve or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited and shall be penalised, according to the importance and repetition of the offences, by penalties ranging from a fine to the exclusion from the race. The repetition of dangerous driving, even involuntary, may result in the exclusion from the race

Now the move Kimi made was deliberate in that he intended to move across into his blindspot which was careless but nevertheless deliberate.

Having been away a few days, I saw this post and feel I should acknowledge that you indeed have posted a relevant rule as published. What I dispute is that Räikkönen deliberately crowded Verstappen to the inside, or that he made an abnormal change of direction. The opposite is true. I also note you 'deliberately' forgot to include 'deliberate' in the underlined quote.I believe that if Räikkönen really had done either of those two things, he would have been investigated, because he was able to continue the race, despite the damage caused to his car. Verstappen wasn't investigated for crowding Räikkönen towards the outside at the second Eau Rouge corner, for the simple reason that he didn't have his car under control. Both drivers were extremely lucky at that point; that could have been a monster accident.

You aren't the first person to come up with the idea of having drivers follow lanes around corners, indeed Bernie Ecclestone thought it was worth thinking about. I believe that if all drivers respect the code of conduct as published, and are forced by the stewards to respect it, then lanes aren't necessary. But for that to be possible, it would first be necessary to make the rules and their interpretation clear and available to all - including race fans. The idea that it is fine for the inside driver, who is slightly ahead at the apex of the corner, to run the outsider into the scenery is downright wrong and continues to make motor racing more dangerous than it should be.

It's the same for the outside driver crowding the inside driver off the track too, it goes both ways.

In any case, this is just careless and incompetent driving that cost another driver their race, so it is punishable by some kind of rule for sure.

It's the same as accidentally or deliberately exceeding track limits is treated the same, as intent does not really come into it when you just look at the negative effect that it has on others. Being blissfully unaware is not a defence when it is careless driving, particularly at turn 1 with cars all around you.

c) curves, as well as the approach and exit zones thereof, may be negotiated by the drivers in any way they wish, within the limits of the track. Overtaking, according to the circumstances, may be done either on the right or on the left. However, manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers such as premature changes of direction, more than one change of direction, deliberate crowding of cars towards the inside or the outside of the curve or any other abnormal change of direction, are strictly prohibited and shall be penalised, according to the importance and repetition of the offences, by penalties ranging from a fine to the exclusion from the race. The repetition of dangerous driving, even involuntary, may result in the exclusion from the race

Now the move Kimi made was deliberate in that he intended to move across into his blindspot which was careless but nevertheless deliberate.

Having been away a few days, I saw this post and feel I should acknowledge that you indeed have posted a relevant rule as published. What I dispute is that Räikkönen deliberately crowded Verstappen to the inside, or that he made an abnormal change of direction. The opposite is true. I also note you 'deliberately' forgot to include 'deliberate' in the underlined quote.I believe that if Räikkönen really had done either of those two things, he would have been investigated, because he was able to continue the race, despite the damage caused to his car. Verstappen wasn't investigated for crowding Räikkönen towards the outside at the second Eau Rouge corner, for the simple reason that he didn't have his car under control. Both drivers were extremely lucky at that point; that could have been a monster accident.

You aren't the first person to come up with the idea of having drivers follow lanes around corners, indeed Bernie Ecclestone thought it was worth thinking about. I believe that if all drivers respect the code of conduct as published, and are forced by the stewards to respect it, then lanes aren't necessary. But for that to be possible, it would first be necessary to make the rules and their interpretation clear and available to all - including race fans. The idea that it is fine for the inside driver, who is slightly ahead at the apex of the corner, to run the outsider into the scenery is downright wrong and continues to make motor racing more dangerous than it should be.

It's the same for the outside driver crowding the inside driver off the track too, it goes both ways.

Agreed. The very idea is unsporting and dangerous.

F1 Racer wrote:

In any case, this is just careless and incompetent driving that cost another driver their race, so it is punishable by some kind of rule for sure.

Again agreed. Verstappen should not have committed the same mistake he made three years ago. What was more positive this time is that he didn't agree with your view of the mistake.

F1 Racer wrote:

It's the same as accidentally or deliberately exceeding track limits is treated the same, as intent does not really come into it when you just look at the negative effect that it has on others. Being blissfully unaware is not a defence when it is careless driving, particularly at turn 1 with cars all around you.

No, this is the mistake you keep making. There is no reason for a driver who can't see a divebomb attempt to make room for the driver trying it. Verstappen may well have understood this time. A bad start is one thing, throwing it all away immediately afterwards is very unwise indeed.

_________________Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.